abba

Rab Safra entered a privy. R. Abba came and emitted a sound at the door. Rab Safra said to him, "Let the master enter." After leaving, R. Abba said to him, "So far thou hast not brought in the demon ; but thou hast received the tradition about the demon. Have we not learnt thus in the Mishnah : There was an open fire-place there [in the Temple-court], and a splendid privy ; and this was its splendid feature : if it was found locked, it was known that somebody was in there, but if it was found open, it was known that it was vacant. Hence infer that it is not proper [to speak in a privy]!

Rab Safra entered a privy. R. Abba came and emitted a sound at the door. Rab Safra said to him, "Let the master enter." After leaving, R. Abba said to him, "So far thou hast not brought in the demon ; but thou hast received the tradition about the demon. Have we not learnt thus in the Mishnah : There was an open fire-place there [in the Temple-court], and a splendid privy ; and this was its splendid feature : if it was found locked, it was known that somebody was in there, but if it was found open, it was known that it was vacant. Hence infer that it is not proper [to speak in a privy]!

Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak said: The Halachah is that [the Sukkah] must be able to contain his head, the greater part of his body, and his table. R. Abba said to him: [In] agreement with whom [is this ruling?] Like Bais Shammai? He [Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak] said to him: According to whom else? (I. E. Who else would it be?)

Another version: R. Abba said to him: Who holds this opinion? He [Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak] said to him: ‘Beth Shammai, and do not change from it’. (I.E. to Bais Hillel)

R. Yirmiyah said: Let us see: R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: Why did they say that bundles of straw, bundles of wood, and bundles of brushwood may not serve as skhakh? Because it may happen that a man returns in the evening from the field with his bundle on his shoulder, and he raises it up and places it on his sukkah to dry it, and then he might decide to leave it there as a skhakh, but the Torah said, "You shall make," [which implies], but not from that which is made. Now since this is a decree lest one use his store-house [as a Sukkah] the other must have been forbidden on the ground of ‘you shall make’ [which implies], but not from that which is made.

And R. Yaakov? He had not heard that [statement] of R. Hiyya b. Abba.

R. Abba said: These cone-shaped bundles of willows, as soon as the top-knots are untied they are valid [as skhakh]. But are they not still tied at the bottom? R. Papa answered, [This is a case] where he loosens them.

R. Abba said in the name of Shmuel: Herbs concerning which the sages said that a person fulfills with them his obligation on Pesah, convey ritual defilement, do not act as an interposition to ritual defilement and invalidate a sukkah in the same manner as an air space What is the reason? — Since when they wither they crumble and fall, they are regarded as though they were not there

R. Abba further said in the name of R. Huna: He who harvests grapes for the vat, does not render their "handles" [stalks] susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness;

To R. Abba this is certainly a tannaitic dispute. But shall we say that it is also a tannaitic dispute according to R. Menashye bar Gada? All agree that he who harvests grain for skhakh does not render the ‘handles’ susceptible to uncleanliness, but here we are dealing with a particular case where he harvests them for food, and then changed his mind [and used them] for skhakh.

R. Hiyya b. Abba answered in the name of R. Yohanan, The former mishnah deals with planed boards and they forbade them as a decree lest he comes to use vessels

R. Abba answered him, [The difference is that] in the former case it combines [with the rest of the Sukkah] and it is permitted to sleep under it; in the latter case it does not combine and it is forbidden to sleep under it.

What is meant by "hotzlot"? R. Abdimi b. Hamduri said marzublei. What is marzublei? R. Abba said, Bags filled with foliage. R. Shimon b. Lakish said: Real mats

GEMARA. What is the reason of R. Judah? R. Zera and R. Abba b. Mamal disagree. One says, It is because the Sukkah has no permanence, and the other says, It is because he props it up with something susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness.

And all who are preoccupied, they too should be exempt? But from that, one who is preoccupied from losing his ship at sea, he should also be exempt. And would you say here also? But Rav Abba bar Zavda said in the name of Rav: A mourner is obligated in all of the mitzvot in the Torah, except for tefillin, as behold, they are spoken of as splendor.

[Going back to] the main text: R. Abba b. Zavda said in the name of Rav: A mourner is obligated in all the commandments of the Torah with the exception of tefillin since the word "beauty" is applied to them’. Since the God said to Ezekiel, "Bind your beauty upon yourself," (Ezekiel 24:17) you are obligated in this, but all other people are exempt.’

R. Abba b. Zavda also said in the name of Rav, A mourner is obligated in the Sukkah Is not this obvious? What might I have said? Since R. Abba b. Zavda said in the name of Rav that he who is in discomfort is exempt from the obligation of Sukkah, this [one] is also in discomfort, therefore he informs us that this applies only to discomfort that comes on its own, but [the mourner] since it is he himself who is the cause of his discomfort, he must settle his mind

R. Abba b. Zavda also said in the name of Rav, A mourner is obligated in the Sukkah Is not this obvious? What might I have said? Since R. Abba b. Zavda said in the name of Rav that he who is in discomfort is exempt from the obligation of Sukkah, this [one] is also in discomfort, therefore he informs us that this applies only to discomfort that comes on its own, but [the mourner] since it is he himself who is the cause of his discomfort, he must settle his mind

And R. Abba b. Zavda said in the name of Rav: A bridegroom and the groomsmen and all the wedding guests are exempt from the Sukkah all the seven days. What is the reason? Because they have to rejoice. But let them eat in the Sukkah and rejoice in the Sukkah? There is no rejoicing but in the huppah. But let them eat in the Sukkah and rejoice in the Sukkah? There is no rejoicing but in the huppah.

Abba Shaul says: "willows" [in the plural means] two, one for the lulav and one for the Temple.

They asked of R. Hiyya b. Abba: If one listened but did not respond — what is the law? He answered them: The sages, the scribes, the leaders of the people and those who expound laid down that if one heard but did not respond he has fulfilled his obligation.

According to whom? If you will say, According to Abba Shaul,did he not say: It is written, “willows of the brook” implying two, one referring to the [aravah in the] lulav and the other to [the aravah for use in] the Temple? If you will say it is according to the rabbis, did they not have it as an accepted tradition, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai.

R. Yirmiyah b. Abba said that the dispute concerns only the music at the Simchat Bet Hashoevah, since R. Yose b. Judah holds that even an added expression of rejoicing overrides the Shabbat, while the Rabbis hold that an added expression of rejoicing does not override [either] the Shabbat [or the Festival], but as regards the music which accompanied the sacrifices, all agree that it is [an integral part of] the worship and it overrides the Shabbat.

R. Hana b. Abba stated: It was said at the house of the Rav: There are four things that the Holy One, blessed be He, regrets having created, and they are the following: Exile, the Chaldeans, the Ishmaelites and the Evil Inclination. “Exile”: as it is written, “Now, therefore, what am I doing here, says the Lord, seeing that My people is taken away in vain” (Isaiah 52:5). “The Chaldeans” as it is written, “Behold the land of the Chaldeans — this is the people that was not” (Isaiah 23:13).

Rav could say to you: This is a tannaitic dispute; for it has been taught, “Here is matzah for you, here is leavened bread for you.” Abba Shaul says: [They said,] “Here is leavened bread for you, here is matzah.

R. 'Ashi said: A scholar who is not hard like iron is not a real scholar, as it is said: "And like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces." Said R. 'Abba to R. 'Ashi, you derive it from that verse, we derive it from the following (Deut. 8.9): "A land whose stones are iron"; do not read 'ābānēha (its stones), but bōnēha (its builders, i.e., the scholars). Said Rabina: It is nevertheless one's duty to train oneself to be gentle, as it is said (Eccl., 11.10): "Remove anger from thy heart and put away evil from thy flesh."

What is the proper course for us, who keep two festival days? Rab says, we should begin to mention the rain in the Musaf prayer (of the first day), omit the mention in the Afternoon, Evening, and Morning prayers, and take it up again in the Musaf prayer (of the second day). Samuel, however, said to the scholars (who reported Rab's view): go and say to 'Abba: "After having declared the day holy, art thou going to declare it again a week-day?" Samuel then decided that one should begin to mention the rain in the Musaf prayer and continue to do so in the Afternoon prayer, but omit it in the Evening and Morning prayer and take it up again in the Musaf prayer.

R. Johanan said: He who conducts himself righteously here below is judged strictly in the heaven above, as it is said, "Truth springeth out of the earth and righteousness hath looked down from heaven." R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba derives this lesson from this verse (Ps., 90.11): "And Thy wrath according to the fear that is due unto Thee." Resh Laḳish derives it from this verse (Is., 64.4): "Thou didst take away him that joyfully worked righteousness."

Resh Laḳish said: He is called pious, for it is said (Prov., 11. 17): "The merciful man doeth good to his own soul." R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba said in the name of Resh Laḳish, a scholar is not allowed to impose fasts upon himself, because it makes him lessen his heavenly work. R. Sheshet said, if a student takes upon himself such a fast, his meal should be given to the dogs.

If the first day of Kislew has come, etc. Said R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba: There are no communal fasts in Babylonia except on the Ninth of Ab.

It is right to forbid all the other actions, because they give pleasure, but why should work be forbidden which causes pain? Said R. Ḥisda in the name of R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba: Scripture says (Joel, 1. 14): "Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly," which indicates that just as on days of a solemn assembly work is forbidden, so also on fast days. If this is the reason, then, just as on days of solemn assembly work must be stopped on the evening before, so it should be stopped on the evening before fast days! Said R. Zera, to me the matter was thus explained by R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba: Since Scripture says (ibidem): "Gather the elders," the fast must be similar to the gathering of the elders, hence just as the gathering of the elders takes place during the day, so the fast is obligatory only during the day. Said R. Shisha, son of R. 'Idi, this statement supports that of R. Huna, who said: The fast-meeting takes place in the morning. What do they do the whole day? Said 'Abbayi: From morning to midday they consider communal affairs, from midday to evening, one quarter of the day is spent in reading the portions from the Pentateuch and the Prophets and the other quarter in praying and asking for mercy, for it is said (Nehem., 9. 3): "And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the law of the Lord their God a fourth part of the day; and another fourth part they confessed, and prostrated themselves before the Lord their God."

It is right to forbid all the other actions, because they give pleasure, but why should work be forbidden which causes pain? Said R. Ḥisda in the name of R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba: Scripture says (Joel, 1. 14): "Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly," which indicates that just as on days of a solemn assembly work is forbidden, so also on fast days. If this is the reason, then, just as on days of solemn assembly work must be stopped on the evening before, so it should be stopped on the evening before fast days! Said R. Zera, to me the matter was thus explained by R. Jeremiah b. 'Abba: Since Scripture says (ibidem): "Gather the elders," the fast must be similar to the gathering of the elders, hence just as the gathering of the elders takes place during the day, so the fast is obligatory only during the day. Said R. Shisha, son of R. 'Idi, this statement supports that of R. Huna, who said: The fast-meeting takes place in the morning. What do they do the whole day? Said 'Abbayi: From morning to midday they consider communal affairs, from midday to evening, one quarter of the day is spent in reading the portions from the Pentateuch and the Prophets and the other quarter in praying and asking for mercy, for it is said (Nehem., 9. 3): "And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the law of the Lord their God a fourth part of the day; and another fourth part they confessed, and prostrated themselves before the Lord their God."

Come and hear: "R. 'Abba the Priest said in the name of R. Jose the Priest, it happened that when the sons of R. Jose b. R. Ḥanina died, he bathed in cold water during all the seven days of mourning!" Answer: There the deaths followed closely one after the other, for we read in a Baraita: If several deaths follow closely upon one another, the mourner may, if his hair becomes too thick, make it thinner with a clipper and he may wash his garments in water. Said R. Ḥisda: He may cut the hair with a clipper, but not with scissors; he may wash his garments in water, but not with natron or aloe. R. Ḥisda further said, this Baraita proves that a mourner is not allowed to wash his garments.

ordained thirteen fast days, but the prayers were not answered. He therefore intended to ordain more fasts, but R. 'Ami said to him, has it not been said that it is not proper to trouble the community too much? Said R. 'Abba son of R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba: R. 'Ami was thinking of his own convenience (because he did not want to fast), for thus said R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba in the name of R. Johanan, that statement (quoted by R. 'Ami) applies only to fasts ordained on account of lack of rain, but in the case of other calamities the people must continue fasting until their prayer is answered. The same was taught in a Baraita: When it was ordained that the people should fast (twice) three days and again seven days, it had reference to drought, but in case of other kinds of calamities they must continue fasting until their prayers are answered. Should we say that this Baraita is a refutation of R. 'Ami? Answer: R. 'Ami can defend himself by replying that the matter is the subject of dispute between different Tannaim, for a Baraita states: No more than thirteen fasts should be enjoined upon the community, as it is not proper to trouble the community too much; this is the opinion of Rabbi; Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says, this is not the reason, but it is because (after the thirteen fasts) the time for rainfall is passed.

ordained thirteen fast days, but the prayers were not answered. He therefore intended to ordain more fasts, but R. 'Ami said to him, has it not been said that it is not proper to trouble the community too much? Said R. 'Abba son of R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba: R. 'Ami was thinking of his own convenience (because he did not want to fast), for thus said R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba in the name of R. Johanan, that statement (quoted by R. 'Ami) applies only to fasts ordained on account of lack of rain, but in the case of other calamities the people must continue fasting until their prayer is answered. The same was taught in a Baraita: When it was ordained that the people should fast (twice) three days and again seven days, it had reference to drought, but in case of other kinds of calamities they must continue fasting until their prayers are answered. Should we say that this Baraita is a refutation of R. 'Ami? Answer: R. 'Ami can defend himself by replying that the matter is the subject of dispute between different Tannaim, for a Baraita states: No more than thirteen fasts should be enjoined upon the community, as it is not proper to trouble the community too much; this is the opinion of Rabbi; Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says, this is not the reason, but it is because (after the thirteen fasts) the time for rainfall is passed.

ordained thirteen fast days, but the prayers were not answered. He therefore intended to ordain more fasts, but R. 'Ami said to him, has it not been said that it is not proper to trouble the community too much? Said R. 'Abba son of R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba: R. 'Ami was thinking of his own convenience (because he did not want to fast), for thus said R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba in the name of R. Johanan, that statement (quoted by R. 'Ami) applies only to fasts ordained on account of lack of rain, but in the case of other calamities the people must continue fasting until their prayer is answered. The same was taught in a Baraita: When it was ordained that the people should fast (twice) three days and again seven days, it had reference to drought, but in case of other kinds of calamities they must continue fasting until their prayers are answered. Should we say that this Baraita is a refutation of R. 'Ami? Answer: R. 'Ami can defend himself by replying that the matter is the subject of dispute between different Tannaim, for a Baraita states: No more than thirteen fasts should be enjoined upon the community, as it is not proper to trouble the community too much; this is the opinion of Rabbi; Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says, this is not the reason, but it is because (after the thirteen fasts) the time for rainfall is passed.

And everyone present takes some of it and puts upon his own head. Why do not the Nasi and the Ab Bet Din take the ashes themselves and put them on their heads? Why is it that someone else has to take them and put them on their heads? Said R. 'Abba of Cæsarea: Because self-humiliation is not the same as

Why did they go out for these ceremonies to the open place of the town? Said R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba: Because they wished to say thereby: We have cried privately and were not answered, now let us humiliate ourselves publicly. Resh Laḳish said, they meant to say: We have exiled ourselves from our synagogues, and exile atones for sin. Does it make any practical difference what reason we adopt? The difference arises with regard to a case where the community leave one synagogue and enter another.

Why did they cover themselves in sackcloth? Said R. Ḥiyah b. Abba, it is as though they said: We regard ourselves before Thee as beasts.

Our Rabbis have taught: A king should have his hair trimmed every day, a high priest every Friday, an ordinary priest once a month. A king everyday—what is the reason? Said R. 'Abba b. Zabda in the name of Rab, because it is written (Is., 33. 17): "Thine eyes shall see the king in his beauty." A high priest every Friday—what is the reason? Said R. Samuel b. R. Isaac, because new divisions of priests come in every Saturday. An ordinary priest once a month—what is the reason? This rule is derived from the occurrence of the word pera' (lock) both in connection with the Nazirite and the priest, for it is written in one place (Ez., 44. 20): "Neither shall they (the priests) shave their heads nor suffer their locks to grow long," and it is written in another place (Num., 6. 5): "He (the Nazirite) shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long," which leads us to the analogy that just as there (in the instance of the Nazirite) the growing of the locks is meant for a period of thirty days, so also here (in the instance of the priests). But whence do you know it to be so in the case of the Nazirite himself? Scripture (ibid.) uses the word yihyeh (יהיה = he shall be), the numerical value of which is thirty. Said R. Papa to 'Abbayi: Is it not possible that the verse (in Ezekiel) means to say that they should not suffer their locks to grow at all? If it were written, Abbayi replied, "they shall not suffer locks to grow long," your interpretation might be correct, but since it is written, "the locks they shall not suffer to grow long", it indicates that they may have locks, but must not let them grow too long. If so, the law ought to apply also to the priests of the present time! No, the prohibition of growing the hair is analogous to that of drinking of wine, so that just as the latter applies only to the time when they enter the Temple for service, so also the former applies only to the time when they might enter the Temple, but when there is no Temple which they might enter, they may let the hair grow. But is it true that wine is permitted when there is no Temple to enter? Does not the following Baraita intimate the contrary? Rabbi says, I would say that a priest should never drink wine, but what can I do, seeing that his misfortune has turned out to be his benefit, whereupon 'Abbayi asked according to whose view the priests of our time drink wine

and was told that they do so in accordance with the view of Rabbi. This proves that the other scholars forbade it, their reason being that the Temple might soon be rebuilt, and we should have no priest fit for the service. Now, does not the same reason hold good also here (in the case of the priests growing their hair long)? No, in this case the priest may have his hair cut and then enter upon his duty. If so, an intoxicated priest might likewise sleep a while and then go to his duty, as Rami b. 'Abba said, a walk of a mile, or a little sleep causes the wine to evaporate? No, for did not R. Naḥman say in the name of Rabbah b. 'Abuha, this holds good only if one drank about a fourth (of a log), but if he drank more than that, walking makes him still more weary and sleep makes him still more drunk?

It was reported: R. Ḥiyya b. 'Ashi said in the name of Rab, the law is in accordance with R. Jose, but Samuel said, it is in accordance with R. Meir. Did Samuel say so? Is it not stated in a Baraita: R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: Why is the word behon (בהון = on them) used (in the Scroll of Fasts) twice in succession? In order to indicate that the prohibition applies only to the days specified, but not to the days immediately preceding or following them—to which Samuel remarked that the law is in accordance with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel! Answer: Originally Samuel was of the opinion that there was no authority as lenient in the matter as was R. Meir, and therefore he said that the law is in accordance with R. Meir, but when he heard of the view of R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, who is still more lenient, he said, the law is in accordance with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel. Bali, too, said in the name of R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba, who had it from R. Johanan: The law is in accordance with R. Jose, whereupon R. Ḥiyya b. Abba said to Bali, I must inform you that when R. Johanan said the law is in accordance with R. Jose, he referred only to those days on which the Scroll of Fasts forbids fasting (but not mourning). Did R. Johanan say so? Did he not say, the law always follows the anonymous opinion of a Mishnah? Now, we read in an anonymous Mishnah: Although it has been decided that under certain circumstances the Megillah of Esther should be read several days before, instead of after, Purim,

It was reported: R. Ḥiyya b. 'Ashi said in the name of Rab, the law is in accordance with R. Jose, but Samuel said, it is in accordance with R. Meir. Did Samuel say so? Is it not stated in a Baraita: R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: Why is the word behon (בהון = on them) used (in the Scroll of Fasts) twice in succession? In order to indicate that the prohibition applies only to the days specified, but not to the days immediately preceding or following them—to which Samuel remarked that the law is in accordance with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel! Answer: Originally Samuel was of the opinion that there was no authority as lenient in the matter as was R. Meir, and therefore he said that the law is in accordance with R. Meir, but when he heard of the view of R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, who is still more lenient, he said, the law is in accordance with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel. Bali, too, said in the name of R. Ḥiyya b. 'Abba, who had it from R. Johanan: The law is in accordance with R. Jose, whereupon R. Ḥiyya b. Abba said to Bali, I must inform you that when R. Johanan said the law is in accordance with R. Jose, he referred only to those days on which the Scroll of Fasts forbids fasting (but not mourning). Did R. Johanan say so? Did he not say, the law always follows the anonymous opinion of a Mishnah? Now, we read in an anonymous Mishnah: Although it has been decided that under certain circumstances the Megillah of Esther should be read several days before, instead of after, Purim,

'Abba the Bleeder received every day a greeting from the heavenly academy while 'Abbayi received one every Friday, and Raba every year on the eve of the Day of Atonement. 'Abbayi felt discouraged on account of the greater distinction of 'Abba the Bleeder. 'Abbayi was therefore told, "Thou canst not perform deeds like those of 'Abba the Bleeder!" What were the deeds of 'Abba the Bleeder? When he performed the operation (of bleeding), he had a separate place for men and another for women. He had a garment ready in which there were numerous slits, and when a woman came, he made her put it on, so that he should not have to look upon her bare body. Outside of his office he had a place (box) where his fees were to be deposited. Whoever had money could put it in, but those who had none could come in without feeling embarrassed. When he saw a person who was in no position to pay, he would offer him some money, saying to him: "Go, strengthen thyself." One day 'Abbayi sent a pair of scholars to him to find out the truth about him. When they came to his house, he gave them to eat and to drink and laid cushions before them to sleep on.

'Abba the Bleeder received every day a greeting from the heavenly academy while 'Abbayi received one every Friday, and Raba every year on the eve of the Day of Atonement. 'Abbayi felt discouraged on account of the greater distinction of 'Abba the Bleeder. 'Abbayi was therefore told, "Thou canst not perform deeds like those of 'Abba the Bleeder!" What were the deeds of 'Abba the Bleeder? When he performed the operation (of bleeding), he had a separate place for men and another for women. He had a garment ready in which there were numerous slits, and when a woman came, he made her put it on, so that he should not have to look upon her bare body. Outside of his office he had a place (box) where his fees were to be deposited. Whoever had money could put it in, but those who had none could come in without feeling embarrassed. When he saw a person who was in no position to pay, he would offer him some money, saying to him: "Go, strengthen thyself." One day 'Abbayi sent a pair of scholars to him to find out the truth about him. When they came to his house, he gave them to eat and to drink and laid cushions before them to sleep on.

'Abba the Bleeder received every day a greeting from the heavenly academy while 'Abbayi received one every Friday, and Raba every year on the eve of the Day of Atonement. 'Abbayi felt discouraged on account of the greater distinction of 'Abba the Bleeder. 'Abbayi was therefore told, "Thou canst not perform deeds like those of 'Abba the Bleeder!" What were the deeds of 'Abba the Bleeder? When he performed the operation (of bleeding), he had a separate place for men and another for women. He had a garment ready in which there were numerous slits, and when a woman came, he made her put it on, so that he should not have to look upon her bare body. Outside of his office he had a place (box) where his fees were to be deposited. Whoever had money could put it in, but those who had none could come in without feeling embarrassed. When he saw a person who was in no position to pay, he would offer him some money, saying to him: "Go, strengthen thyself." One day 'Abbayi sent a pair of scholars to him to find out the truth about him. When they came to his house, he gave them to eat and to drink and laid cushions before them to sleep on.

'Abba the Bleeder received every day a greeting from the heavenly academy while 'Abbayi received one every Friday, and Raba every year on the eve of the Day of Atonement. 'Abbayi felt discouraged on account of the greater distinction of 'Abba the Bleeder. 'Abbayi was therefore told, "Thou canst not perform deeds like those of 'Abba the Bleeder!" What were the deeds of 'Abba the Bleeder? When he performed the operation (of bleeding), he had a separate place for men and another for women. He had a garment ready in which there were numerous slits, and when a woman came, he made her put it on, so that he should not have to look upon her bare body. Outside of his office he had a place (box) where his fees were to be deposited. Whoever had money could put it in, but those who had none could come in without feeling embarrassed. When he saw a person who was in no position to pay, he would offer him some money, saying to him: "Go, strengthen thyself." One day 'Abbayi sent a pair of scholars to him to find out the truth about him. When they came to his house, he gave them to eat and to drink and laid cushions before them to sleep on.

The next morning the scholars took the cushions with them and brought them to the market place. 'Abbayi then sent for 'Abba, and the scholars requested him to appraise the value of the cushions. 'Abba said, they are worth so and so much. "But, perhaps, they are worth more?" the scholars inquired. "This is what I paid for them," he replied. "Of what did you suspect us?" the scholars asked. "I thought," he said, "the gentlemen happened to be in need of money for some charitable purpose and were ashamed to tell me." "Take them back now," they said. "No," he replied, "from that moment I diverted my mind (from them), considering them consecrated to charity."

The next morning the scholars took the cushions with them and brought them to the market place. 'Abbayi then sent for 'Abba, and the scholars requested him to appraise the value of the cushions. 'Abba said, they are worth so and so much. "But, perhaps, they are worth more?" the scholars inquired. "This is what I paid for them," he replied. "Of what did you suspect us?" the scholars asked. "I thought," he said, "the gentlemen happened to be in need of money for some charitable purpose and were ashamed to tell me." "Take them back now," they said. "No," he replied, "from that moment I diverted my mind (from them), considering them consecrated to charity."

The alarm is sounded on account of any calamity that comes upon the community, except that of excessive rain. What is the reason? Said R. 'Abba in the name of Samuel, because it is not allowed to pray for the cessation of too much good. R. 'Abba further said in the name of Samuel, whence do we learn that one is not to pray for the cessation of too much good? From the statement (Malachi, 3. 10): "Bring ye the whole tithe into the store-house, that there may be food in My house, and try Me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than sufficiency." What is the meaning of "that there shall be more than sufficiency?" Said Rami b. R. Yud in the name of Rab, it means that your lips will grow tired saying, "it is enough".

The alarm is sounded on account of any calamity that comes upon the community, except that of excessive rain. What is the reason? Said R. 'Abba in the name of Samuel, because it is not allowed to pray for the cessation of too much good. R. 'Abba further said in the name of Samuel, whence do we learn that one is not to pray for the cessation of too much good? From the statement (Malachi, 3. 10): "Bring ye the whole tithe into the store-house, that there may be food in My house, and try Me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than sufficiency." What is the meaning of "that there shall be more than sufficiency?" Said Rami b. R. Yud in the name of Rab, it means that your lips will grow tired saying, "it is enough".

'Abba Hilkiah was the grandson of Ḥoni the Circle-drawer. Once the Rabbis sent to him a pair of scholars that he should pray for rain. When they came to his house they did not find him at home. They went to see him in the field and found him ploughing the ground. They greeted him,

but he did not heed them. Towards evening he was picking up chips of wood and, on his way home, carried the chips on one shoulder and his cloak on the other. The whole way long he did not put on his shoes, but when he had to cross the water he put them on. When he came across thorns and shrubs he lifted up his garments, and when he reached the city, his wife came to meet him bedecked with her finery. When he arrived at the door of his house, he let her enter first, then he followed. He sat down to eat, but did not invite the scholars to join him. Distributing cakes to the children, he gave to the older child one and to the younger two. Turning to his wife, he said: "I know that these scholars came to see me on account of rain; let us go up to the roof and pray; the Holy One, blessed be He, will, perhaps, accept our prayer and there will be rain." When on the roof, he stood praying in one corner and she in another. The clouds appeared first over the corner where his wife stood. He came down and asked the scholars: "Why did the Rabbis come?" "The Rabbis sent us to the Master, that you might pray for rain to come," they replied. Said he: "Blessed be the Lord who put you beyond the need of Abba Hilkiah's prayer!" They, however, replied: "We know well that this rain is come through you, but be that as it may, we should like you to explain to us those actions of yours that greatly surprised us: Why, when we greeted you, did you not heed us?" "I hired myself out for the day, so I thought I had no right to interrupt my work." "Why did you carry the chips of wood on one shoulder and your cloak on the other?" "It is a borrowed garment," he said, "and it was loaned to me for the purpose of wearing, but not for the purpose of placing wood on it." "Why did you not put on your shoes the entire way," the scholars continued, "but when you had to cross the water you put them on?" "Because the entire way," he replied, "I could see (what I was stepping on), in the water I could not see." "Why did you lift up your garments when you came upon thorns and shrubs?" "Because the one (a scratch on the body) heals up, the other (a rent in the garment) does not heal up." "Why did your wife come to meet you so well dressed?" "In order that I should not cast an eye upon another woman." "Why did your wife enter the house first and you after her?" "Because ye are not known to me". "Why did you not invite us to eat with you?" "Because there was not enough food and I did not want to get your thanks for nothing." "Why did you give one cake to the older child and two to the younger?" "The older one stays at home, while the younger goes to school." "Why did the clouds appear first over the corner where your wife was standing?" "Because the woman is usually in the house, and the good she does is direct. (Or it may be because there were some highwaymen living in my neighborhood; I prayed that they should die, while she prayed that they should improve their ways)."

R. Shemen b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: The verse says, “To uphold these days of Purim in their times.” They established many “times” for them.

And why did R. Shemen b. Abba not derive the rule from the expression “as the days”? He can say to you: This is meant to make the rule apply to future generations.

Up to what distance? — R. Jeremiah, or you may also say R. Hiyya b. Abba, said: As far as from Hamtan to Tiberias, which is a mil. Why not say [simply] a mil? It teaches us what is the measure of a mil—as far as from Hamtan to Tiberias.

And R. Jeremiah — or you may also say R. Hiyya b. Abba —said: The [alternative forms of the] letters M’N’Z’P’K were prescribed by the Watchmen.

Jeremiah — or some say R. Hiyya b. Abba — also said: The Targum of the Torah was composed by Onkelos the convert under the guidance of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua. The Targum of the Prophets was composed by Jonathan ben Uzziel under the guidance of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, and the land of Israel [thereupon] quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs by four hundred parasangs, and a Heavenly Voice came out and exclaimed, “Who is this that has revealed My secrets to mankind?”

“And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision; for the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, and they fled to hide themselves” (Daniel 10:7). Who were these “men”? Jeremiah — or some say, R. Hiyya b. Abba — said: These were Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.

They thought this means that t hey should read the Megillah at night, and teach the Mishnah [about it] in the morning. Jeremiah said to them: It has been explained to me by R. Hiyya b. Abba [that the word “repeat” here has the same meaning] as when, for instance, people say, I will go through this section and repeat it.

With regard to these they said that they should be pushed forward but not postponed. What is the reason? Abba said in the name of Shmuel: The text says, “And it shall not pass” (Esther 9:27).

And R. Abba said in the name of Shmuel: From where do we know that years are not to be counted by days? Because it says, “Of the months of the year” (Exodus 12:2) [which implies] that you reckon a year by months but not by days.

The Rabbis of Caesarea said in the name of R. Abba: How do we know that a month is not reckoned by its hours? Because it says, “Until a month of days” (Numbers 11:20): You reckon a month by days, but you do not reckon a month by hours.

Abba b. Zavda said in front of him: Rabbi, this was not the case. Rather, what happened was that Tisha B’av [on that year] fell on Shabbat, and they postponed it till after Sabbath, and he said to them, Since it has been postponed, let it be postponed altogether, but the Sages would not agree. He thereupon applied to himself the verse: Better are two than one (Ecclesiastes 4:9).

Against the proof of R. Meir it may be objected that perhaps that [verse should be interpreted like] R. Hiyya b. Abba who said that Bigtan and Teresh were two men from Tarsis.

But why not say [the words of] Gomer and Magog? R. Hiyya b. Abba replied: he reason is because it is written, “Let God enlarge [yaft] Yapheth”: let the beauty of Yapheth be in the tents of Shem.

Abba b. Kahana opened his discourse on this section from here: “For to the man that is good in his sight he gives wisdom, and knowledge and joy” (Ecclesiastes 2:26). This is the righteous Mordecai. “But to the sinner He gives the task, to gather and to heap up”; this is Haman. “That he may leave it to him, that is good in the sight of God”; this refers to Mordecai and Esther, as it is written, “And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman” (Esther 8:20).

“Six months with the oil of myrrh” (Esther 2:12). What is the oil of myrrh? R. Hiyya b. Abba said: Stakat. R. Huna said: Oil from olives not a third grown. It has been taught: R. Judah says: Anpikon is oil of olives not a third grown. Why is it used for smearing? Because it removes hair and makes the skin soft.

"In those days, while Mordecai sat in the king's gate, Bigtan and Teresh were enraged" (Esther 2:21). R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: The Holy One, blessed be He, [once] caused a master to be angry with his servants in order to fulfil the desire of a righteous man, namely Joseph, as it says, "And there was with us there a young man, a Hebrew, etc." (Genesis 41:12);

“And the king said to Haman, The silver is given to you and the people also, to do with them as it seems good in your eyes.” R. Abba said:

“And the king removed his ring” (Esther 3:10): R. Abba b. Kahana said: This removal of the ring was greater than forty-eight prophets and seven prophetesses who prophesied to Israel; for all these were not able to turn Israel to do good, and the removal of the ring did turn them to do good.

“Go, gather together all the Jews . . . which is not according to the custom” (Esther 4:16). R. Abba said: It was not according to the custom. For every other day she was forced [to be with Ahashverosh], but now it was willingly. “And if I perish, I perish.” As I am lost to my father’s house so I shall be lost to you.

Rami b. Abba said: In all they were two hundred and eight, as it says, “And the multitude [verov] of his sons.” But verov in gematria is two hundred and fourteen? R. Nahman b. Isaac said: The word is written defectively.

Abba said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba who said it in the name of Rav: The halakhah accords with R. Muna. And Shmuel said: The halakhah does not accord with R. Muna. This is the version taught in Sura. In Pumbedita the following version was taught: R. Kahana said in the name of Rav: The halakhah accords with R. Muna, but Shmuel said that the halakhah does not accord with R. Muna. R. Bibi reverses the statement, [making] Rav say that the halakhah does not accord with R. Muna and Shmuel say that it does accord with R. Muna.

Abba said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba who said it in the name of Rav: The halakhah accords with R. Muna. And Shmuel said: The halakhah does not accord with R. Muna. This is the version taught in Sura. In Pumbedita the following version was taught: R. Kahana said in the name of Rav: The halakhah accords with R. Muna, but Shmuel said that the halakhah does not accord with R. Muna. R. Bibi reverses the statement, [making] Rav say that the halakhah does not accord with R. Muna and Shmuel say that it does accord with R. Muna.

R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: One who reads the Megillah written among the rest of the Writings, he has not fulfilled his obligation; and he at once protested against this remark: [This was stated in reference to reading]: In a congregation.

R. Hiyya b. Abba also said in the name of R. Yohanan: That a space should be left unstitched [in the Sefer Torah] is a halakhah from Moshe on Sinai and he at once protested the remark by saying: They only said this so that it should not be torn.

R. Hiyya b. Abba also said in the name of R. Yohanan: Had there remained in the cave in which Moses and Elijah stood a hole the size of the eye of a fine needle, they would not have been able to endure the light, as it says, “For man shall not see me and live” (Exodus 33:20).

R. Hiyya b. Abba also said in the name of R. Yohanan: What is the meaning of what is written, And on them was written according to all the words which the Lord spoke with you in the Mount” (Deuteronomy 9:10)? It teaches us that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses the minute details of the Torah, and the minute details of the Scribes, and the innovations which would be introduced by the Scribes; and what are these? The reading of the Megillah.

The question was raised: Should the person who takes the Maftir Aliyah be counted among the seven? R. Huna and R. Jeremiah b. Abba: One said that he does count and the other that he does not count. The one who says he does count, for he too reads, while the

But where the subject is not completed, we do not [read less than twenty-one verses]? Didn't R. Shmuel b. Abba say: Many times I stood before R. Yohanan, and when I had read ten verses he said, Stop! In a place where there is a translator it is different, since R. Tahlifa b. Shmuel has taught: They only taught this in a place where there is no translator, but where there is a translator a stop may be made [earlier].

GEMARA. From where do we know this? R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: Because the verse says, "But I will be sanctified among the children of Israel" (Leviticus 22:32): every act of sanctification should not be done with less than ten.

Rami b. Abba was building a synagogue. There was a certain old synagogue which he wanted to tear down, and to bring the bricks and beams from it and use them for the other. He was sitting and trying to figure out the implications of what R. Hisda had said, for R. Hisda said: A man should not tear down a synagogue until he has built another [to take its place]. The reason there [that it was prohibited] was so that there should be no negligence. But what about in a case like this? He came in front of R. Papa, who forbade him; and in front of R. Huna, and he also forbade him.

If it falls on Shabbat itself: R. Huna said: All agree that Parshat Zakhor is not read on the Shabbat before. But R. Nahman said: There is still a dispute. It was also stated: R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Abba, who had it from Rav:... If Purim falls on Sabbath, Zakor is read on the Shabbat.

If it falls on Shabbat itself: R. Huna said: All agree that Parshat Zakhor is not read on the Shabbat before. But R. Nahman said: There is still a dispute. It was also stated: R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Abba, who had it from Rav:... If Purim falls on Sabbath, Zakor is read on the Shabbat.

Ola said that Resh Lakish said, If a man set apart ten beasts for his Chagigah, he may bring five on the first high holiday, and may again bring five on the second high holiday. R. Jochanan said, When he has finished, he cannot bring again. R. Abba said, But they do not really differ. The one is the case where he keeps silence, the other where he declares his intention. This expression, When he keeps silence—explain it. Perhaps there was not time in the day to bring them. In that case they are not brought, because there was not time in the day. But perhaps he has none to eat with him. In that case they are not brought, because he has none to eat with him. No; this is not such a case; and so far as this goes, it is necessary that he should bring them. For there is time in the day, and he has people to eat with him. Inasmuch as he did not bring them at the earlier time, learn from this that he left them behind intentionally; and this also is the purport of the story, how when Rabbin came, R. Jochanan said, If a man set apart ten beasts for his Chagigah, he may bring five on the first high holiday, and may again bring five on the second high holiday. They are in appearance difficult to reconcile, but in reality not. For learn from this that the one is the case when he keeps silence, the other when he declares his intention. Learn from this that the point has been also distinctly settled. R. Shemen bar Abba said that R. Jochanan said,

Ola said that Resh Lakish said, If a man set apart ten beasts for his Chagigah, he may bring five on the first high holiday, and may again bring five on the second high holiday. R. Jochanan said, When he has finished, he cannot bring again. R. Abba said, But they do not really differ. The one is the case where he keeps silence, the other where he declares his intention. This expression, When he keeps silence—explain it. Perhaps there was not time in the day to bring them. In that case they are not brought, because there was not time in the day. But perhaps he has none to eat with him. In that case they are not brought, because he has none to eat with him. No; this is not such a case; and so far as this goes, it is necessary that he should bring them. For there is time in the day, and he has people to eat with him. Inasmuch as he did not bring them at the earlier time, learn from this that he left them behind intentionally; and this also is the purport of the story, how when Rabbin came, R. Jochanan said, If a man set apart ten beasts for his Chagigah, he may bring five on the first high holiday, and may again bring five on the second high holiday. They are in appearance difficult to reconcile, but in reality not. For learn from this that the one is the case when he keeps silence, the other when he declares his intention. Learn from this that the point has been also distinctly settled. R. Shemen bar Abba said that R. Jochanan said,

Halachoth concerning Sabbath. But there is much in Holy Writ concerning it. Nay, but it was necessary, so as to agree with the words of R. Abba, for R. Abba said, He who digs a hole on the Sabbath, when it is only needed for the sake of the earth from it, is permitted to do so. According to whom is this teaching? According to R. Simeon, who said, A work which is not necessary for its own sake is permitted. If thou sayest, According to R. Jehudah, his teaching is that there are two cases to be distinguished, and that in the one the man does something which effects good, in the other harm. What is the meaning of the expression, as mountains suspended by a hair? It refers to the fact that

Halachoth concerning Sabbath. But there is much in Holy Writ concerning it. Nay, but it was necessary, so as to agree with the words of R. Abba, for R. Abba said, He who digs a hole on the Sabbath, when it is only needed for the sake of the earth from it, is permitted to do so. According to whom is this teaching? According to R. Simeon, who said, A work which is not necessary for its own sake is permitted. If thou sayest, According to R. Jehudah, his teaching is that there are two cases to be distinguished, and that in the one the man does something which effects good, in the other harm. What is the meaning of the expression, as mountains suspended by a hair? It refers to the fact that

There is a certain passage which says, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10), and there is a certain passage which says, "Is there any number of his armies?" (Job xxv. 3) There is no difficulty. The one was at the time when the Holy House was standing, and the other was at the time when the Holy House was not standing. As though it were possible to say that the family of the Most High was diminished. There is a Baraitha, Rabbi says in the name of Abba Jose ben Dosai, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him," this is the number of one troop, but of His troops there is no number. And R. Jeremiah bar Abba said, Thousand thousands ministered unto him at the fiery stream, as it is said, "A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10). Whence does it come forth? From the perspiration of the living creatures. And upon what is it poured? R. Zot'ra bar Tobiah said that Rab said, Upon the heads of wicked men in Gehenna, as it is said, "Behold the tempest of the LORD, even his fury, is gone forth, yea, a whirling tempest; it shall burst upon the head of the wicked" (Jer. xxiii. 19). And R. Acha bar Jacob said, Upon those who were held back, as it is said, "Who were held back before their time, whose foundation was poured out as a stream" (Job xxii. 16). There is a Baraitha to the effect that R. Simeon the Holy said, These are nine hundred and seventy-four generations, which were held back from being created

There is a certain passage which says, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10), and there is a certain passage which says, "Is there any number of his armies?" (Job xxv. 3) There is no difficulty. The one was at the time when the Holy House was standing, and the other was at the time when the Holy House was not standing. As though it were possible to say that the family of the Most High was diminished. There is a Baraitha, Rabbi says in the name of Abba Jose ben Dosai, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him," this is the number of one troop, but of His troops there is no number. And R. Jeremiah bar Abba said, Thousand thousands ministered unto him at the fiery stream, as it is said, "A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10). Whence does it come forth? From the perspiration of the living creatures. And upon what is it poured? R. Zot'ra bar Tobiah said that Rab said, Upon the heads of wicked men in Gehenna, as it is said, "Behold the tempest of the LORD, even his fury, is gone forth, yea, a whirling tempest; it shall burst upon the head of the wicked" (Jer. xxiii. 19). And R. Acha bar Jacob said, Upon those who were held back, as it is said, "Who were held back before their time, whose foundation was poured out as a stream" (Job xxii. 16). There is a Baraitha to the effect that R. Simeon the Holy said, These are nine hundred and seventy-four generations, which were held back from being created

What did he expound? Rabbah bar bar-Channah said that R. Jochanan said, "And he came from the ten thousands of holy ones" (Deut. xxxiii. 2). He is clearly marked among His ten thousand. And R. Abohu said, "The chiefest among ten thousand" (Cant. v. 10). He is a sign among His ten thousand. And Resh Lakish said, "The LORD of hosts is His name" (Is. xlviii. 2). He is LORD amid His host. And R. Chia bar Abba said that R. Jochanan said, "The LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. And behold, the LORD passed by" (1 Kings xix. 11, 12).

Everyone, who does not respect the glory of his Maker, it would have been a mercy for him that he had not come into the world. What is the case here meant? R. Abba said, This is the man who gazes into the rainbow. R. Joseph said, This is the man who commits a transgression secretly. In support of the explanation that it means the man who gazes into the rainbow, it is written, "As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about" (Ezek. i. 28). This is the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. R. Joseph said, The explanation that this is the man who commits a transgression secretly, agrees with the view of R. Isaac, for R. Isaac said, Every one who committeth a transgression secretly is as though he jarred the feet of the Shechinah, as it is said, "Thus saith the LORD, the heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool" (Is. lxvi. 1). Is it so? and yet R. El'a the elder said, If a man sees that his evil nature is mastering him, let him go to a place where they do not know him, and let him put on black garments, and cover himself with black, and do what his heart desireth, but let him not profane the name of God openly. There is no difficulty. The one is the case of a man who has found a means of checking his evil nature, the other of a man who has not found a means of checking his evil nature.

Menahem went out, Shammai entered in, etc. Whither did he go out? Abai said, He went out to destruction. Rabba said, He went out for the service of the king. There is also a Baraitha to this effect, that Menahem went out for the service of the king, and there went out with him eighty pairs of disciples clothed in Syrian robes. R. Shemen bar Abba said that R. Jochanan said, Let the sabbath rest be by no means a light thing in thine eyes; for lo, the laying on of the hands is only prohibited on account of the Sabbath rest, and the great men of the nation were divided upon the matter. That is self-evident. But as this is a case of a Sabbath rest which clashes with a positive command, there was need of it. But this also is self-evident. It was to meet the objection of the person who says, In the matter of the laying on of the hands itself men are divided. We learn from this that it is in the matter of Sabbath rest that they are divided. Ramai bar Chama said, Learn hence that we require the laying on to be done with all one's strength, for if thou dost imagine that we do not require it to be done with all one's strength, how is the idea of work involved in the laying on of the hands? Some people adduce the passage, "Speak unto the sons of Israel ... and he shall lay his hand" (Lev. i. 2, 4). The sons of Israel lay on their hands, but the daughters of Israel do not lay on their hands. R. Jose and R. Ishmael say, Daughters of Israel lay on their hands by permission. R. Jose said, Abba El'azar related to me the following story: Once we had a calf belonging to the sacrifices of peace-offerings, and we brought it to the court of the women, and the women laid their hands upon it, not because the laying on of the hands belongs to women, but so as to gratify the women. And if thou dost imagine we require the laying on of the hands to be done with all one's strength, dost thou mean to say that in order to gratify women we introduced work into holy things? But do we not learn hence that we do not require it to be done with all one's strength? Nay, by all means I will grant you that we require it to be done with all one's strength. He said to them, Rest your hand upon it. If so, it was not because the laying on of the hands belongs to women that it was done. Thou mayest conclude that it has nothing at all to do with the nature of the laying on of the hand. R. Ami says, He is establishing two things; one that it has nothing at all to do with the nature of the laying on of the hands, and the other that it was done in order to gratify the women. Rab Papa said, Learn hence, Sides, and not the head only, are forbidden; for if thou dost imagine that sides are allowed, might they not lay hands on the sides? But no; learn hence that sides are forbidden.

Menahem went out, Shammai entered in, etc. Whither did he go out? Abai said, He went out to destruction. Rabba said, He went out for the service of the king. There is also a Baraitha to this effect, that Menahem went out for the service of the king, and there went out with him eighty pairs of disciples clothed in Syrian robes. R. Shemen bar Abba said that R. Jochanan said, Let the sabbath rest be by no means a light thing in thine eyes; for lo, the laying on of the hands is only prohibited on account of the Sabbath rest, and the great men of the nation were divided upon the matter. That is self-evident. But as this is a case of a Sabbath rest which clashes with a positive command, there was need of it. But this also is self-evident. It was to meet the objection of the person who says, In the matter of the laying on of the hands itself men are divided. We learn from this that it is in the matter of Sabbath rest that they are divided. Ramai bar Chama said, Learn hence that we require the laying on to be done with all one's strength, for if thou dost imagine that we do not require it to be done with all one's strength, how is the idea of work involved in the laying on of the hands? Some people adduce the passage, "Speak unto the sons of Israel ... and he shall lay his hand" (Lev. i. 2, 4). The sons of Israel lay on their hands, but the daughters of Israel do not lay on their hands. R. Jose and R. Ishmael say, Daughters of Israel lay on their hands by permission. R. Jose said, Abba El'azar related to me the following story: Once we had a calf belonging to the sacrifices of peace-offerings, and we brought it to the court of the women, and the women laid their hands upon it, not because the laying on of the hands belongs to women, but so as to gratify the women. And if thou dost imagine we require the laying on of the hands to be done with all one's strength, dost thou mean to say that in order to gratify women we introduced work into holy things? But do we not learn hence that we do not require it to be done with all one's strength? Nay, by all means I will grant you that we require it to be done with all one's strength. He said to them, Rest your hand upon it. If so, it was not because the laying on of the hands belongs to women that it was done. Thou mayest conclude that it has nothing at all to do with the nature of the laying on of the hand. R. Ami says, He is establishing two things; one that it has nothing at all to do with the nature of the laying on of the hands, and the other that it was done in order to gratify the women. Rab Papa said, Learn hence, Sides, and not the head only, are forbidden; for if thou dost imagine that sides are allowed, might they not lay hands on the sides? But no; learn hence that sides are forbidden.

What real difference is there between what Raba and what R. Ela says? There is this difference between them. In the case of a basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and cleansed, according to the one who says, The prohibition is because of interposition, there is an interposition; but according to the one who says, The prohibition is for a precaution, lest haply needles and pipes should be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin, the answer is, there is no basket or wine-strainer the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And Raba has acted consistently with himself; for Raba said, In the case of a basket and wine-strainer, which are filled with vessels and dipped, all are clean; but in the case of a bath, which is divided by a basket or wine-strainer, he who seeks to cleanse there—the cleansing avails him nought, for lo, all the earth is trembling, and we require that there should be forty seahs of water in one place. And these words refer to a clean vessel, but in the case of an unclean vessel, seeing that the cleansing has gone up over the whole surface of the vessel, it has gone up also over the vessels which are in it. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., Vessels which are filled with vessels and are dipped, lo, these are clean, and if they are not dipped, the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin (Mikvaoth, vi. 2). How is it that it says, And if they are not dipped? This is the meaning, viz., And if it is not necessary to dip them, still the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin. And lo, as regards the sayings of Raba and R. Ela, they are the subject of a Baraitha. For there is a Baraitha, A basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and are dipped are clean as well for hallowed things as for a heave-offering. Abba Saul says, For a heave-offering, but not for hallowed things. If so, then is not a heave-offering also invalid? No, for to whom are we speaking? Is it not to teachers? teachers who are possessed of knowledge? But if so, the same rule will apply to hallowed things also. No, for a common person sees him and goes and dips. Then in the case of heave-offering also, a common person sees him and goes and dips. We need not receive it from him. Hallowed things also we need not receive from him. He would be angry. In the case of heave-offering also he would be angry.

The addition was only necessary for the rest of the meat-offering. For the teaching of the Law is, What stands in need of a vessel, the vessel includes it; what does not stand in need of a vessel, the vessel does not include it. But our Rabbis went farther and ordained that although a thing do not necessarily belong to a vessel, the vessel includes it. This will be all right as regards flour, but what is to be said about incense and frankincense? R. Nachman said that Rabbah bar Abuah said, It is as though men heaped things up upon a large piece of leather. According to the Law if it have an inside, it includes them; if it have not an inside, it does not include them. But our Rabbis went farther and ordained that although it have no inside, it includes them. And the view of R. Chanin differs from that of R. Chia bar Abba. For R. Chia bar Abba says that R. Jochanan says, This Mishnah is taught from the testimony of R. Akiba.

The addition was only necessary for the rest of the meat-offering. For the teaching of the Law is, What stands in need of a vessel, the vessel includes it; what does not stand in need of a vessel, the vessel does not include it. But our Rabbis went farther and ordained that although a thing do not necessarily belong to a vessel, the vessel includes it. This will be all right as regards flour, but what is to be said about incense and frankincense? R. Nachman said that Rabbah bar Abuah said, It is as though men heaped things up upon a large piece of leather. According to the Law if it have an inside, it includes them; if it have not an inside, it does not include them. But our Rabbis went farther and ordained that although it have no inside, it includes them. And the view of R. Chanin differs from that of R. Chia bar Abba. For R. Chia bar Abba says that R. Jochanan says, This Mishnah is taught from the testimony of R. Akiba.

We have a canonical Mishnah elsewhere, viz., The house of Shammai and the house of Hillel agree, that we are to investigate a field in which a person is buried, for those who are keeping the Passover, but we do not investigate for those who desire to eat heave-offering (P'sachim 92b, i. 1). What is the meaning of investigate? R. Jehudah said that Samuel said, A man blows upon the unclean place as he walks along. And R. Chia bar Abba in the name of Ola said, An unclean place of this sort that is trodden is clean. For those keeping Passover they did not insist upon their decisions, as it was a case of cutting off, but for those who desired to eat heave-offering they did insist on their decisions, as it was a case of death. It was a question for them, In the case of a man who has investigated for his Passover, what about his eating his heave-offering. Ola said, He who has investigated for his Passover is free to eat his heave-offering, but Rabbah bar Ola said, He who has investigated for his Passover is forbidden to eat his heave-offering. That old man said to him, Do not thou contradict Ola's assertion, for there is a canonical Mishnah which bears him out, viz., But if he say, I have separated and put into the midst of it a fourth part of something consecrated for hallowed things, he is believed (Chag. 24b, ii. 15). Consequently, seeing that he is believed about hallowed things, he is believed also about heave-offering; and so here too, seeing that he is believed about passover, he is believed also about heave-offering.

Abba Shaul says: Just as cutting wood is optional [for someone and therefore he should not be punished], so too, anything that is optional [should not receive punishment] except the father who strikes his son, the teacher who rebukes his student [through beating], and the messenger of the court [who gives punishments through lashings].